Squilliam said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
NJ5 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
NJ5 said:
Regarding point 3, I think what Squilliam is saying is that no 360 game requires a mandatory install, while plenty of PS3 games do, so 360's drive is at least not worse than the PS3's. I don't think he's saying that it's necessarily better.
|
If you see my post on this page (3), Halo 3 uses the HDD (if present). That increases the speed of data delivery. How much you wanna bet that this wasn't a one time implementation? ;)
|
Uses the HDD if present = non-mandatory installation.
|
Hello. you CAN'T have a mandatory installation if NO HDD exists, of course. You CAN have mandatory installations IF a HDD exists in EVERY console. We are talking about things that WOULD LEAD to the end result.
|
Mandatory installations are a negative for a game, its not exactly a positive marketing bullet point. Developers would prefer not to use them.
|
It may not be a positive MARKETING bullet point (due to the X360 fans turning it into a negative marketing bulle tpoint). However, make no mistake, it's DEFINITELY a postive for the game itself. Lower load times and better performance are POSITIVES...not negatives. Obviously, SOME developers WOULD prefer to use them. They have the option to set up a better streaming engine. Naughty Dog said it only takes about 3 days to do so and is essential. Look at their results.
